Jharkhand High Court
Narayan Oraon @ Deonarayan Oraon vs The State Of Jharkhand on 19 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B. A. No. 11197 of 2020
Narayan Oraon @ Deonarayan Oraon ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
For the Petitioner : Ms. L. Banerjee, Adv.
For the State : Mr. S.K. Dueby , Addl. P.P.
02 / 19.01.2021
Heard the parties through Video Conferencing.
Learned counsel for the petitioner personally undertakes to
remove the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within two weeks
after the lockdown is over.
In view of the personal undertaking given by learned
counsel for the petitioner the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter
are ignored for the present.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Kisko
P.S. case no. 44 of 1994 (S.T. No. 70 of 2020) registered under Sections 342,
354, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the
allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner outraged the
modesty of the victim girl. It is then submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioner that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further
submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that though the charge-
sheet was submitted in this case on 03.08.1995 under Sections 342, 354 34
of the Indian Penal Code but later on, cognizance has been taken for the
offences punishable under sections 366/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code on
12.09.1995. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner
that this is old case and the petitioner had no knowledge about the case as
he had gone outside the State to earn his livelihood and after returning, he
knew that permanent warrant of arrest has been issued against him and
he was arrested. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioner that the co-accused has been acquitted vide the judgment dated
25.07.2019 in S.T. no. 33 of 2015 of the court of Additional Sessions Judge,
1st Lohardaga and in paragraph 8 of the said judgment which is in
running page 26 of the brief, where in her deposition, the victim who has
been examined as PW1 in the said case, has mentioned that she fell down
because of rush and commotion and nothing was done to her. It is further
submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has
been in judicial custody since 20.07.2020 as mentioned in paragraph 25 of
the bail application and the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate
with the trial of the case hence, the petitioner may be released on bail.
Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
Considering the facts of the case, the petitioner is directed to be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty
Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Lohardaga in
connection with Kisko P.S. case no. 44 of 1994 (S.T. No. 70 of 2020)
subject to the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of
the case.
(ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)
Smita/-
